PawlaczGMD

I was just trolling, I barely did the training missions in the Jeff and don't actually know what you mean either way.

Are you sure you don't mean a speed change? It's due to different reasons. I barely notice having to do any correction due to a POWER change. Probably the strongest in the K4, but it still feels like a mostly static aileron correction rather than a one that depends on engine power. You can slam the power from idle to WEP and it's not a big deal.

you should email Chengdu with your feedback

sad, it made me wonder how you feel no twisting from the engine

do you mean that you think engine torque is not modelled correctly? I definitely don't feel much torqueing when slamming power in any warbird...

When you bounce, are you supposed to add power and go around? Trying to slam it down again never ended too well for me.

People often confuse lifting after an improper landing with "bounciness" in tail-draggers. The Spitfire is not "bouncy", the lift-off is not caused by some elasticity of the gear. When you land too fast and not at 3-point attitude, the tail will immediately drop when you touch the ground, which will increase the pitch and AoA. This increases lift and you go back up. If you don't want to bounce, learn to 3-point land correctly, or just do a wheel landing - land on 2 wheel in neutral pitch and hold the tail up as long as possible. And actually a lot of losses in WWII were due to various accidents.

Spotting is very dependent on your resolution and VR hardware. For me in VR, turning off AA helps a lot with spotting. I don't really like the current spotting dot system. But in here there is no shame in using dot icons imho.

Yeah, you should have enough fuel with a safe margin. I did extra maneuvers, and messed up by not keeping track of the range location, so ended up way north for RTB, still made it back.

True - The 21 and F-5 are by far the worst offenders in how broken their AI FM is, and ED should have tuned them both a long time ago. People who make missions frequently resort to adding extra internal weight to these two to reign them in.

I hate these scripted SAM launches in campaigns, with how it works in DCS it's a dice roll. IMHO you should not be low enough for an IR SAM shot that can't be evaded kinetically. All I can advise is to cut burner and set a program to dump all flares when you see a launch. It's just RNG in DCS, so each flare has an equal chance of spoofing the missile.

That's just how differential braking works. You need to input rudder or else the brake is applied to both sides equally. Just bind one or both of the toe brakes to the brake axis and use it as the lever? I don't think what you want is possible because it would fundamentally change the functioning of the brake system, this is not just a control reassignment.

Ok, looking at this EM diagram, here with 2x aim9 and 2x aim7, so lighter than in campaign, your max rate is around 14 deg/s at 500 kts. This is about equal to the F-5, so you will lose the rate with 8 missiles, but I would still shoot for 500 kts. Also try the aim7 in flood mode against the sky if he extends.

You should be able to beat him 1v1 if the AI wasn't bugged, but I'm not sure you can rate him at any speed with full AA stores. But there are more ways to win than just staying at rate speed and waiting. A clean F-4 should outrate him though. I don't have the EM diagram for the F4 but I would try a slightly higher speed like I said. In MP, where AI nonsense is no factor, F-4 vs Mig-21 as an F-5 stand-in is close and will depend on skills, tactics, fuel, loadout, etc.

The F-5 flight model is bugged and overperforms (ED doesn't acknowledge this afaik, but it's really obvious), also is just very good at defense. Even if it was correct, I don't think you can outrate him with 8 missiles loaded. About the same rate sounds right. Use the egg + lag like in the prev missions, or hope that he engages your wingman. Also try higher speeds like 480 to catch up to him. I did not see a huge difference in M6, and managed to pass it 2/3 times.

The combat parts have us equipped with aim9B, but during takeoff and RTB we have aim9J. It doesn't really matter but they look noticeably different.

Why is the performance the same for CW and regular Spit? I would think that one config would have lower drag.

yes, you need to add extra weight to the 21 AI to make it closer to realistic.

I'm in mission 7 now, and I never had any issues with triggers, etc. Good job! I do a stored heading, but never had much of a problem with drift, and you're supposed to follow lead until you get a hang of it anyway.

I agree with your overall sentiment that the Mig-21 is a good buy on sale, and it's great that it exists in DCS. However, it also has issues that would not be acceptable in any other DCS module individually, let alone together. Of the top of my head, in order of severity: - Flight model bugged at low speed. Turn rate increases as you approach stall, and according to some data I've seen, it is almost maximal near stall speed. This is quite severe, and is exploited/observed all the time in MP. Some low speed behavior is also too scripted/predictable. - Gun sight is unrealistic, has fictional A2G modes that barely make sense. - Radar is very outdated, ground clutter is barely simulated, or just painted on, behind in quality of most other planes, and overperforming strongly in comparison to a/c of the era. 21 can get a lock near the deck, but F-5 or F-4 couldn't dream of it? Doubtful. - There are some extremely dated textures inside the cockpit, everything on the floor is a 2D sprite, below the stick, just bad. - Why do all missile hardpoints just simultaneously detach when taking damage sometimes? These are not just some minor bugs that any module has. $60 for the current state is not a good value proposition, I think the module is as popular as it is because of how iconic and critical to CW this a/c is, but it needs to be updated badly. I would be happy to pay for an upgrade like the Ka-50.

I also experience some stutter after the last update. It is interestingly not happening in the cockpit, but in the menus, and when using external views. This is new.

This is true, but the Anton is very tough anyways. You need to hit the engine, pilot, or hope to start a fire. Firing low caliber machine guns into the wings or tail from 6 o clock is not a great way to take them down. Lead more in the turn to hit the front of the plane, or attack from below and hit below the engine. Good thing is the Anton is probably the worst-performance dogfighter we have.

Well, you can uninstall modules you don't use selectively with the module manager, and liveries don't take much space. The reality is that you need to buy a 2TB SSD to keep up.

Yes please, let's use the HB tech to upgrade the F-5 radar. It looks really fake and unrealistic. Although I have to concede that since the Tiger has no radar-guided missiles, this is not critical, and the current radar is fine for practical purposes, if not accurate/nice.

It might not be just resolution, but keep in mind that pixel density of the Crystal is actually around double that of G2 due to it scaling as an area (square law), so I wouldn't say that it isn't big. The actual resolution rendered is also larger than nominal pixel resolution due to how VR is distorted, so it might be even larger than that. The difference in FOV is not large at all. And yes, I agree that 6nm is a poor visibility result, that's why I'm complaining about the way the game is rendered for me. I believe my Pimax is set up properly, this is the only visual issue I have. I will try to tune some in-game AA options, and try to reduce the VR resolution to see if it makes a difference. I don't want to go below 100% resolution though, as it just makes the game look noticeably worse.